See also: Consciousness is simply food rearranged
Hydrogen atom transfer (HAT) reactions are ubiquitous and play a crucial role in chemistries occurring in the atmosphere, biology, and industry.
My comment: The link from physics to chemistry and the conserved molecular mechanisms of biologically-based RNA-mediated cell type differentiation has been the focus my works for more than 20 years, even before I knew what I would need to explain about the energy-dependent links from angstroms to ecosystems via hydrogen-atom energy in all living genera.
Different configurations of electrons give rise to specific elements, making carbon atoms, for instance, distinct from hydrogen atoms.
My comment: Without the different configurations of electrons, energy-dependent changes in angstroms could not be linked from hydrogen-atom transfer (HAT) in DNA base pairs in solution to all biodiversity in all ecosystems. Simply put, the sun’s biological energy must be linked from atmospheric chemistry to biophysically constrained protein folding chemistry on Earth.
When these interactions are seen for the first time the experimental evidence must confirm theories. Otherwise physicists will try to come up with new untestable theories to stall scientific progress. Serious scientists make progress when experimental evidence is accepted. Chemists typically know what to accept. So do molecular biologists.
What do evolutionary theorists or other social scientists know about physics, chemistry, or molecular epigenetics? How do pseudoscientists known what to accept when they already have accepted only theories?
For comparison, serious scientists know that angstroms measure distance, and every angstrom is dynamic in the context of energy-dependent RNA-mediated cell type differentiation. How can any serious scientist understand the claims of theorists made in the context of articles like this:
We know for sure humans and Neanderthals had sex because of a Swedish scientist named Svante Pääbo, who “more or less invented the field of paleogenetics,” Elizabeth Kolbert wrote in a terrific New Yorker article in 2011.
My comment: Elizabeth Kolbert lied and used Svante Pääbo’s works to support her ridiculous claim:
We know for sure humans and Neanderthals had sex…
Serious scientists know that Svante Pääbo is the senior author of two articles. The two articles linked Natural Selection on the Olfactory Receptor Gene Family in Humans and Chimpanzees and Loss of Olfactory Receptor Genes Coincides with the Acquisition of Full Trichromatic Vision in Primates.
Natural selection for the de novo creation of olfactory receptor genes and the loss of genes is not an indicator that humans and Neanderthals had sex. It is an indicator that natural selection for energy-dependent codon optimality occurred in the context of the physiology of reproduction in all primates. For contrast, all serious scientists know that members of two different species do not have sex. Chromatin remodeling and chromosomal rearrangements limit fertility among species via their nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled physiology of reproduction and their behavior. The behavior is linked to energy-dependent codon optimality via the physiology of reproduction, not by sex between consenting humans and Neanderthals.
Is is silly to ask questions about sex for love without consideration of fertility, since the sexual interactions must be linked to survival of the species via biophysically constrained RNA-mediated protein folding chemistry in the context of the physiology of reproduction. The biophysical constraints are energy-dependent, but the theorists’ and journalists’ preference for fiction is clear.
Robert Sawyer is a science fiction author who won the Hugo Award — one of sci-fi’s highest honors — for his 2002 book Hominids, a story that imagines a parallel world where Neanderthals survived and we didn’t. In the book (which spawned a trilogy), a Neanderthal physicist opens up a rift between the worlds and falls in love with a human.
For comparison, see this presentation text about Greg Bear’s novels in which he detailed for his non-technical audience how the nutrient energy-dependent pheromone-controlled physiology of reproduction is linked from RNA-amino acid substitutions to all cell type differentiation in all individuals of all species. The Darwin Code
This study identified enhanced structural and functional patterns in the olfactory network of sommeliers. These findings are consistent with the learning they undergo in achieving the status of Master Sommelier. Furthermore, the volume of a region of the brain involved in olfactory memory was associated with experience, suggesting that the continued training results in morphological changes of the brain. These results speak to the plasticity of the adult brain in response to sensory expertise.
Overall, these differences suggest that specialized expertise and training might result in enhancements in the brain well into adulthood,” the study states. “This is particularly important given the regions involved, which are the first to be impacted by many neurodegenerative diseases.
My comment to the Scientist (I have posted: 361 comments so far)
20 years ago, we published: From Fertilization to Adult Sexual Behavior, which was a review of RNA-mediated cell type differentiation. We included a section on molecular epigenetic in the Hormones and Behavior review.
Unfortunately, few people realize that natural selection for energy-dependent codon optimality links the de novo creation of genes from the creation of G protein-coupled receptors to chemotaxis and to phototaxis before biophysically constrained energy-dependent biodiversity via RNA-mediated protein folding biochemistry can be linked to all biodiversity by amino acid substitutions.
When others report that mutations are linked to pathology, they seem to miss the fact that virus-driven energy theft causes the mutations. Nutrient-energy dependent viral latency has gone missing from explanations that would otherwise link what is known about biologically-based cause and effect from physics to chemistry and everything known about molecular epigenetics.
My comment: Pseudoscientists could challenge representations like this if they had experimental evidence for comparison. They don’t. They have only their ridiculous theories, which they report in the story about sex between modern humans and Neanderthals. It is unadulterated pseudoscientific nonsense and nothing more than an unsubstantiated fictional account. It is not science fiction. The theorists claims are not scientifically based.
Both articles cite Kohl (2013) Nutrient-dependent/pheromone-controlled adaptive evolution: a model
12. Plotnick, Dornbos, and Chen (2010). Others who advocate smell-first are Lucia Jacobs (Jacobs, 2012), who says the building of smell maps of environmental space came first and James Kohl (Kohl, 2013), whose model says chemical ecology is the main driver of adaptive evolution. — p. 263
My comment: Chemical ecology is the main driver of energy-dependent ecological adaptations. It is not not the driver of mutation-driven evolution, and so far there is no other model for comparison to my model of chemical ecology. I deliberately used the term adaptive evolution to see if someone would take the bait and offer another model for comparison. No one did.
My comment: Lieff still presents cellular intelligence in the context of evolution. He ignores what is known about hydrogen-atom energy in DNA base pairs in solution. That shows how successful a blogger can be if they simply fail to address what is known about biophysically constrained RNA-mediated cell type differentiation. His focus is on evolution! That means he does not need to explain anything about how evolution occurs, or explain what he thinks cellular intelligence is or where it came from!
See for comparison: Direct interrogation of the role of H3K9 in metazoan heterochromatin function
Tight DNA is supercoiled DNA and it protects the orgnaized genomes of all living genera from virus-driven energy theft and genomic entropy. Simply put, supercoiled DNA biophysically constrains virus-driven energy theft, which is the only way to establish a link from ecological variation to ecological adaptation without inventing another ridiculous theory.
Nutrient energy-dependent microRNAs are the obvious link from olfaction to biophysically constrained RNA-mediated protein folding chemistry, plasticity, and prevention of all pathology.
Supercoiled DNA is the link to viral latency, which is the link to healthy longevity.
See also, from the Neuroscience FB group “As simple as random can be”
My comment: There is no experimental evidence of biologically-based cause and effect that links anything except energy or energy theft to the species-specific COMT Val158Met amino acid substitution during life history transitions and the development of morphological and behavioral phenotypes.
…the COMT val158met polymorphism is not found in species other than humans (Palmatier et al., 1999).
My comment: That fact makes the COMT val158met polymorphism a “smoking gun” in the context of energy-dependent de novo gene creation and virus-driven energy theft that links gene losses to loss of function via differences in G protein-coupled receptors.
Excerpt from the conclusion:
… Pumby may present a simplified context in which to insert Pumilio modules to study how specific amino acids contribute to the emergent properties of modular RNA binding, independent of position-specific effects.
See also: Another gate-keeping attempt by Feierman